Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
General Trek
»
Original Universe versus Prime et al.
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Zipacna: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Guardian 2000: There's no irony. I'm the only one listening to him. You're trying so hard to reject what he's saying you just tried to overrule him using Goldsman. [/QUOTE]Mate, you're the one insisting that new Trek isn't in the classic timeline in direct contradiction of what Kurtzman has said on multiple occassions. No offence, but that's a strangely unique way of listening to him. It's beggars belief that you've got there in black & white from one of the executive producers that the novels are non-canon, and your answer...well, they're wrong. Isn't is just as likely that you've just put two and two together and made five, like so many others here have pointed out? Robert Orci also had the following to say about the novels when interviewed about them contemporary to that you're quoting from Kurtzman: "TrekMovie.com: Of course the books are not officially part of Star Trek canon, but as fans of the books are you guys going to grab any elements and give them little mentions in the film…essentially canonizing them? Roberto Orci: We are actually still pouring through and we are going to do stuff like that for sure. Because it would be an homage to my and Damon [Lindelof]’s view of Star Trek." And to extended your quote from Kurtzman to give more context to what he's saying: "I did actually note at one point when I was asked about the graphic novels and comics that after 50-plus years it’s literally impossible to stay entirely consistent with canon because there have been very dry years in Star Trek and very full years and so many different writers have attempted to fill in the gaps in the dry years of what happened to beloved characters in the absence of a show driving those answers, they end up inventing things and we end up being faced with whether to call that canon. But it’s always a conversation." Notice the last part of the quote...where Kurtzman directly says that they debate whether the novels are canon because of inconsistencies. Doesn't sound much like they're all canon if it's "always a conversation"... My reading of everything is that they're trying not to over-rule the novels where possible, largely because they obviously still want to make money out of them. It is, after all, a business. That doesn't mean they're canon any more than they used to be. It just means that they're doing what they always did...picking & choosing what parts of the extended universe to acknowledge (such as when Uhura got a first name, etc). [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3